🚀 go-pugleaf

 
 
In ca.politics phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone) said: 
 
 
>In article <3ooirg$2b7@inet-nntp-gw-1.us.oracle.com>
rherrick@us.oracle.com  
>(Rick Herrick) writes: 
>    >>1. The planet, our planet Earth, is not alive. It can not 
>    >>die. It does not live. 
>    >> 
>    >You're limiting the Earth to the chunk of rock underneath our 
>    >feet. To be a little more explicit for you, the organisms on 
>    >our planet are dying at a pretty good clip. With the 
>    >extinction of various species, we lose a little more of the 
>    >variety provided for us on this planet, whether by God or 
>    >providence, it doesn't really matter. It's all we've got. And 
>    >it IS alive. Unless you wish to deny the existence of a 
>    >linked biosphere? 
> 
>1. Well, the Earth IS the rock under our feet. You want we should include 
>   the moon? 
 
 
The earth is not a rock. 
 
 
 
>2. Organisms die all the time, and at a pretty good clip. I just read that

>   in people with HIV, a billion white cells die every 24 hours. 
> 
>   What you are ignorantly trying to spout is the eco-nonsense of lots of 
>   species dying -- which there is NO repeat NO scientific evidence for. 
 
 
 
 
White blood cells are blood cells not organisms. 
 
 
 
 
>3. What many people are in ignorance of is that most all species in effect

>   live as if in pursuit of the death of every other species. Take say,
rats. 
>   Rats would be perfectly fine with, and would if they could, take away
all 
>   our food for rats to eat, starving all humans to death. 
> 
>   Any linage in the biosphere (a religous concept in deed) is that of
war. 
> 
>And again, Earth is NOT alive. 
> 
 
 
We have evolved beyon being rats and can act intellegently. I do not think
that we should justify all of our behavior by what rats do.